Re: [resend][PATCH] mm: increase RECLAIM_DISTANCE to 30

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



* Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> [2010-10-08 10:45:16]:

> On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Balbir Singh wrote:
> 
> > I am not sure if this makes sense, since RECLAIM_DISTANCE is supposed
> > to be a hardware parameter. Could you please help clarify what the
> > access latency of a node with RECLAIM_DISTANCE 20 to that of a node
> > with RECLAIM_DISTANCE 30 is? Has the hardware definition of reclaim
> > distance changed?
> 
> 10 is the local distance. So 30 should be 3x the latency that a local
> access takes.
>

Does this patch then imply that we should do zone_reclaim only for 3x
nodes and not 2x nodes as we did earlier.
 
> > I suspect the side effect is the zone_reclaim_mode is not set to 1 on
> > bootup for the 2-4 socket machines you mention, which results in
> > better VM behaviour?
> 
> Right.
> 

-- 
	Three Cheers,
	Balbir

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]